Showing posts with label The Ark of the Covenant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Ark of the Covenant. Show all posts

The Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia Has it been found?

by 

Ark of the Covenant
The Patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia announced that on Friday, June 26, 2009, he will unveil to the world the Ark of the Covenant. [Editor's Note: The following Monday the Patriarch supposedly denied he had announced the unveiling.]

The Problematic Legend

There has been a legend for many years that the Ark of the Covenant is in the Saint Mary of Zion Church in Axum, Ethiopia. In recent years this legend has been popularized in the writings of Grant Jeffrey, a Canadian Bible prophecy writer who often specializes in the sensational.
Saint Mary of Zion Church
This legend is based on a bizarre story that the Ark was smuggled out of Jerusalem by Menelik I, the supposed son of a union between the Queen of Sheba and King Solomon. Supposedly, a replica of the Ark was left in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. The motivation for moving the Ark was to protect it from King Manasseh, one of the most ungodly kings in the history of Judah.
There are all kinds of problems with this legend. For one thing, it is doubtful that the Queen of Sheba ruled over Ethiopia. It is more likely that her realm was modern day Yemen.
Regarding Menelik I, he ruled over Ethiopia around 950 B.C., according to tradition. Manasseh did not become king of Judah until 253 years later.
Harry Atkins, an Ethiopian historian, contends that there is no record of this legend in Ethiopian history until the end of the 13th Century. At that time there was a dispute over who should be king, and one of the contenders claimed to be a descendant of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. Atkins says it was at that point that the legend of the Ark entered into Ethiopian history.
The insurmountable problem with the Ethiopian legend is that 2 Chronicles 35:3 states that the Ark was still in the Temple during the time of King Josiah who reigned from 640 to 609 B.C.
Rabbi Shlomo Goren, former Chief Rabbi of Israel (now deceased), spent his life studying the Temple Mount, the Temple, and the Ark of the Covenant. He always argued vehemently that it would have been impossible for anyone, including the priests of the Temple, to have unguarded access to the Ark. He dismissed the whole story as a "foolish suggestion" and a "joke." Modern day rabbis in Israel also consider the story to be ridiculous. Their consensus of opinion is that the Ark is hidden in a secret compartment beneath the Temple Mount.

The Ark's Disappearance

No one knows for sure what happened to the Ark. The last time it is mentioned in Scripture is in 2 Chronicles 35:3. That passage makes it clear that the Ark was still in existence at the time of the spiritual revival led by the boy king, Josiah. Within 22 years after Josiah died, Judah fell to the Babylonians (586 B.C.), and the Ark disappeared.
No one knows for sure what happened to the Ark. Some scholars believe it was simply destroyed when the Temple was burned. Others believe it was captured as a prize of war, taken to Babylon, and probably melted down for its gold. This latter theory seems to be substantiated by the Scriptures. For example, in 2 Chronicles 36:18 it states that when the Babylonians destroyed the Temple, they took "all the articles of the house of God, and broke down the wall of Jerusalem and burned all its fortified buildings with fire, and destroyed all its valuable articles."
The strongest tradition is that the Ark was taken out of the Temple by Jeremiah and hidden. Some are convinced he hid it in the ground on the Temple Mount. But most who hold to the Jeremiah rescue theory believe he either hid the Ark in a great cavern beneath the Temple Mount (known today as Solomon's Quarry) or that he hid it somewhere near Mt. Nebo in the modern day nation of Jordan.
The latter theory finds support in the apocryphal book of 2 Maccabees. The narrative in that book says, "the prophet, warned by an oracle, gave orders for the tabernacle and the ark to go with him when he set out for the mountain which Moses had climbed to survey God's heritage. On his arrival, Jeremiah found a cave dwelling, into which he brought the tabernacle, the ark, and the altar of incense, afterwards blocking up the entrance" (2 Maccabees 2:4-5).
Another theory regarding the fate of the Ark is that it was translated or raptured, being taken up to Heaven to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Chaldeans. This theory is based upon a reference to the Ark in Revelation 11:15. This passage is a flash forward to the end of the Tribulation when Heaven opens and Jesus returns in wrath. The writer states that when Heaven opened "the ark of His covenant appeared in His Temple." Those who reject this theory argue that the Ark seen in Heaven in this passage is the heavenly reality of which the Ark of the Covenant was only an earthly shadow or copy (Hebrews 8:5).

The Ark in Bible Prophecy

Regardless of what happened to the Ark, the Scriptures suggest that it will never be found again. This comes as quite a shock to some Christians who have assumed that the Ark must be found before the Tribulation Temple can be built and animal sacrifice reinstituted. Others have simply assumed that the Ark would be replaced in the Holy of Holies when the Lord's Millennial Temple is built.
But Jeremiah says point blank that "the ark of the covenant of the Lord... shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they miss it, nor shall it be made again" (Jeremiah 3:16). The context of this passage is the Millennial reign of Jesus, so it does not rule out the possibility of a discovery prior to that time. Conceivably, the Ark could be discovered, and Satan could use its discovery to incite the rebuilding of a Temple where an apostate sacrificial system would be reinstituted. We know that such a Temple will be built, but I doubt if its construction will be motivated by the discovery of the Ark.
The important point to keep in mind here is that the rediscovery of the Ark is not essential to the rebuilding of the Temple. After all, the Temple was rebuilt by Zerubbabel following the Babylonian captivity, and the Ark had already been lost by that time. There was no Ark in the Holy of Holies during the time when Jesus worshiped in the Temple.
Nor is the Ark needed for the Millennial Temple. Ezekiel describes the Temple in great detail (chapters 40-42), and he never mentions the Ark. There is a Holy of Holies (Ezekiel 41:4), but it is empty, and it is not separated from the Holy Place by a veil.
The Ethiopians may have an object they venerate and consider to be the Ark. But I personally believe there is no possibility that it is the original Ark of the Covenant.

More Info

Concerning the Ark of the Covenant, read about the search for and it's destiny.

The Ark of the Covenant Its origin, purpose and destiny

by 

It was in the mid-1980's, and I was hosting a pilgrimage group on a tour of the Holy Land. We had made the long drive from the Sea of Galilee to Jerusalem and had arrived in "the city of the Great King" exhausted.
It seemed like I had hardly gone to sleep when I was jolted awake by the telephone. Assuming it was my wake up call, I lifted the receiver and mumbled, "Thank you."
I was surprised to hear a familiar voice on the other end. "Hello, David, I'm calling from Texas!"
"From Texas!" I replied. "All the way from Texas?"
"Yep," answered my friend, "and guess what? They've found the ark!"
"The what?"
"The ark!"
"Noah's?"
"No, dummy, the Ark of the Covenant."
Needless to say, that statement really woke me up.

A Startling Discovery

My friend proceeded to explain that he had just read in the Dallas Morning News about the discovery of the lost Ark of the Covenant. It had supposedly been found on Mount Pisgah (Mt. Nebo) in Jordan by a religious group from Kansas.
It all sounded a little far out to me. I suspected that someone had lost touch with reality after having seen the currently popular movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Ark of the Covenant
Nonetheless, I rushed down to the hotel lobby to get the latest copy of The Jerusalem Post. Sure enough, there on the first page was the story. The writer evidently shared my skepticism because the headline read: "Thar's an Ark in Them Thar Hills!"

A Suspect Discovery

The story was right out of Alice in Wonderland. Some end-time sect from Winfield, Kansas, calling itself the Institute for Restoring Ancient History International, had issued a statement claiming to have discovered the Ark in a sealed passageway inside Mt. Pisgah.
They offered no evidence, even though they claimed to have taken photographs. They also refused to reveal the exact location of their find.
The leader of the group, who had a reputation for being anti-Semitic, said he was going to prove his good will toward the Jews by turning all his evidence over to David Rothschild.
When asked why he had selected Rothschild, he replied that he considered Rothschild to be the leader of the Jews (an old anti-Semitic attitude!). He also explained that he felt Rothschild had the power to help his group in dealing with the Jordanian government and the Vatican.

A Provocative Discovery

The headlines have since subsided. The Kansas group has returned to its anonymity in the wheat fields. And the movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark, has become an adventure classic.
But the incident and movie motivated a lot of questions, some of which relate to end time events. What was the Ark of the Covenant? Why was it so important to the Jews? What happened to it? Will it be found again? Is it essential for the rebuilding of the Jewish temple?

The Bible and the Ark

The origin of the Ark is to be found in Exodus 25:10-22. God ordered Moses to build the Ark to house the tablets of stone on which He had written the Ten Commandments. The Ark was a box approximately 4 feet long, 2 1/2 feet wide, and 2 1/2 feet high. It was made of acacia wood and was overlaid with gold inside and out.
The lid that covered the box was called the "mercy seat." It was made of pure gold. Two gold cherubim were mounted on the lid, one on each end. The cherubim faced each other, and their wings were spread out toward each other, overshadowing the mercy seat.
According to Hebrews 9:4, two other items were later added to the contents of the Ark. One of these was a pot of manna, the miraculous food that God supplied the children of Israel in the wilderness (Exodus 16). The other item was Aaron's rod that budded (Numbers 17). And according to Deuteronomy 31:24-26, the Ark also contained the Pentateuch of Moses (the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures.)
Later, these additional items must have been removed from the Ark, because when the Temple of Solomon was dedicated, the Ark contained only the tablets of stone with the ten commandments engraved upon them (2 Chronicles 5:7-10).
The Ark was housed in the Holy of Holies, the innermost chamber of the Temple. Once a year, on the Day of Atonement, the High Priest entered that Holy of Holies and sprinkled blood on the mercy seat to atone for his sins and the sins of the nation of Israel (Leviticus 16 and Hebrews 9). Because God had promised Moses that He would commune with Israel "from above the mercy seat" (Exodus 25:22), the concept developed that the Lord of Hosts was enthroned on the cherubim of the Ark (see1 Samuel 4:4 and Isaiah 37:16).

The Symbolism of the Ark

Much has been made of the symbolism of the Ark, and rightfully so. Suffice it to say that every aspect of the Ark pointed to Jesus.
The acacia wood symbolized our Lord's humanity. The gold overlay denoted His deity. The Ten Commandments and the Pentateuch inside the Ark pictured Jesus with the Law of God in His heart, living in perfect obedience to it. The pot of manna spoke of Jesus as the Bread of Life or our life sustainer. Aaron's rod that budded obviously prophesied the resurrection.
The mercy seat was also a symbol that pointed to the Messiah. It was representative of the fact that the work of Jesus on the Cross would cover the Law of God with His mercy, making it possible for those who put their faith in Jesus to be reconciled to God. It is an illustration of how the divine throne was transformed from a throne of judgment into a throne of grace by the atoning blood that was sprinkled on it.

The Ark's Pilgrimage

As the children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, the Ark was carried before them on golden poles by the priests, following "the cloud of the Lord" in order "to seek out a resting place for them" (Numbers 10:33). The Ark was carried into Canaan when the Israelites crossed the Jordan, and it was instrumental in their victory over Jericho (Joshua 6). During the 400 year period of the Judges, the Ark was housed in the Holy of Holies at the Tabernacle that was erected at the religious center of Shiloh (Judges 18:31 & 1 Samuel 1:3).
During the latter part of the period of the Judges, when apostasy was rampant in Israel, the decision was made to carry the Ark into a battle against the Philistines as a good luck charm (1 Samuel 4:1-4). This desecration of the sacred Ark enraged the Lord, and He allowed the Philistines to win the battle and capture the Ark (1 Samuel 4:5-11).
The Philistines took the Ark to Ashdod where they placed it in the Temple of Dagon. But the Ark proved to be a hot box for the Philistines. When all sorts of calamities began to afflict them, they decided to return the Ark (1 Samuel 5 & 6).
Ark Travel Map
It was first taken to Gath, but when the men of the city were afflicted with tumors, it was sent to Ekron where similar afflictions broke out. At that point it was loaded onto a cart pulled by two cows and pointed in the direction of Israel. The cows wandered about until they arrived at the village called Bethshemesh. When the people of that town ventured out of curiosity to look inside the Ark, a great number were struck dead (1 Samuel 6:19-21). They quickly decided to allow the Ark to continue its journey. It ended up at the village of Kiriath-jearim, located just a few miles northwest of Jerusalem (1 Samuel 7:1-2). It remained there for almost 70 years in the house of Abinadab. (The 70 years were the last 20 years of Samuel's judgeship, the 40 years of Saul's kingship, and the first seven years of David's reign in Hebron, before he moved to Jerusalem).
Church of the Ark of the Covenant
When David arrived in Jerusalem, the first priority of his administration was to provide the Ark a proper resting place because He was anxious to bring the symbol of the presence of God back into the life of the nation (Psalm 132: 1-5). The Ark's return was an occasion for great rejoicing (1 Chronicles 15:25-29). David placed it in a tent on Mount Moriah (today's Temple Mount) where it remained until his son Solomon built the Temple. The Holy of Holies in that Temple became the final resting place of the Ark (1 Kings 8 and 2 Chronicles 5).

The Lost Ark

No one knows for sure what happened to the Ark. The last time it is mentioned in Scripture is in 2 Chronicles 35:3. That passage makes it clear that the Ark was still in existence at the time of the spiritual revival led by the boy king, Josiah. Within 22 years after Josiah died, Judah fell to the Babylonians (586 B.C.), and the Ark disappeared.
The majority of scholars believe it was simply destroyed when the Temple was burned. Others believe it was captured as a prize of war, taken to Babylon, and probably melted down for its gold. But many believe it survived and is hidden somewhere today.

The Destruction Theory

Those who believe the Ark was lost when the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple point to 2 Kings 24:13 and the parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 36:18. Both assert that "all the articles of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the Lord" were taken to Babylon. But the Jewish sages have always argued that King Solomon anticipated attacks on Jerusalem and the Temple and that he therefore constructed a vault for the Ark that was located deep within the Temple Mount and protected by mazes and false passageways.1 Further, they point out that when the Jews were released from Babylonian captivity by Cyrus, the Ark is not mentioned in the list of Temple treasures that were given to those who were returning to Jerusalem (Ezra 1:5-11).
The idea of a secret vault beneath the Temple Mount is certainly plausible. Furthermore, the existence of such a hiding place is implied in 2 Chronicles 35 where we are told that King Josiah ordered the Levitical priests to restore the Ark to the Temple. It had evidently been removed during the reign of the evil King Manasseh who desecrated the Temple with altars devoted to foreign gods (2 Chronicles 33:1-5).
Further evidence that the Ark may have been destroyed by the Babylonians is the fact that the Ark was never restored to the Holy of Holies when the Second Temple was built after the return of the Jews from Babylonian captivity. Each year at Yom Kippur when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies, he would sprinkle the blood on a portion of bedrock that protruded from the floor — supposedly the rock on which the Ark had traditionally rested. This rock was called "the foundation stone."2 The fact that the Holy of Holies remained barren of the Ark is attested to by the Roman historian, Tacitus. He states that when the Roman general, Pompey, conquered Judah in 63 BC, he entered the Holy of Holies and found it completely empty.3
The Jewish sages counter-argue that the reason the Ark was never restored to the Holy of Holies in the Second Temple is because the Jews were never independent after they returned to their land. First they were under Persian control, and then they were conquered by the Romans. They maintain that because of this foreign domination, the Ark was left in its hiding place during the Second Temple period (516 BC to 70 AD).

The Jewish Tradition

As indicated above, the Jewish tradition is that the Ark was placed in an underground vault at the time of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, and it remains there to this day. This tradition is affirmed by several passages in the Talmud. The Jewish sages also believe that entombed with the Ark are other Temple treasures such as the Tabernacle of Moses (the tent temple used during the wilderness wanderings and the period of the Judges), the incense altar, Aaron's rod, the pot of manna, and the tablets of Moses.4
In 1967 during the Six Day War the Jews regained control of the Old City of Jerusalem for the first time in modern history. Hopes soared among many of the Orthodox Jews that this momentous event would give them the opportunity to explore underneath the Temple Mount to find the vault containing the Ark. However, General Moshe Dayan, acting on his own authority, decided almost immediately to surrender control of the Mount back to the Muslim authorities. He did this to prevent any attempt to destroy the Dome of the Rock. He also felt that such a gesture would indicate to the Arabs that the Israelis wanted to live in peace with them. Dayan was a secular Jew, and the Temple Mount meant little to him.
Ever since that time, Israel has had sovereignty over the Temple Mount, but has relinquished control of it to Muslim authorities. This has made it impossible for the Jews to conduct any archeological excavations on or under the Temple Mount.
Dome of the Spirit
In 1981 some Jewish rabbis started clearing debris from an area next to the Wailing Wall area in order to set up a synagogue. In the process they discovered what is called Warren's Gate. It was a gate that had been discovered a century earlier by the British explorer Charles Warren during an underground probe, but had never been fully excavated. This was believed to be the gate that led to the area closest to the Holy of Holies. The gate was sealed, but the rabbis broke it open and started tunneling under the Temple Mount toward the area that would be beneath the Holy of Holies. But before they could get very far, they were discovered by the Muslim authorities and were forced to stop.
The current Jewish Rabbinate takes the position that the Ark is definitely located in a vault under the Temple Mount but they have ruled that no Jew can enter the vault until the Messiah appears and reveals the exact location of the Holy of Holies.5
One of Christendom's foremost authorities on the Ark is Randall Price, a Bible prophecy expert and a professor of Judaic Studies at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. He has concluded that the Ark is still in existence and is located under the Temple Mount.6

The Jeremiah Tradition

One of the oldest and strongest traditions regarding the fate of the Ark is one that is found in the apocryphal book of 2 Maccabees which was written during the inter-Testamental period. It contends that Jeremiah fled Jerusalem with the Ark and buried it in a cave in Mount Nebo which is located in the modern day nation of Jordan.
The narrative in that book says:
"...the prophet, warned by an oracle, gave orders for the tabernacle and the ark to go with him when he set out for the mountain which Moses had climbed to survey God's heritage. On his arrival, Jeremiah found a cave-dwelling, into which he brought the tabernacle, the ark, and the altar of incense, afterwards blocking up the entrance"
(2 Maccabees 2:4-5).
The two books of Maccabees are not part of the accepted biblical cannon and are therefore not considered to be inspired of God. The story about Jeremiah could be true, or it could simply be a legend.

The Vatican Tradition

There are some people who believe the Ark of the Covenant is in the Vatican. They base this belief on the fact that the arch that was built in Rome to honor Titus's victory over the Jews contains a frieze that shows Jewish captives carrying a large menorah, which is a seven-branched candelabrum.
Arch of Titus
Many assume the menorah is the one from the Temple, but that is unlikely for several reasons. First, its base is octagonal in shape with graven images. The Temple menorah is always described in Jewish literature as having a three-legged or triangular base. And no item in the Temple would have had any graven images on it. That would have been considered gross idolatry. Also, the Temple menorah was made of solid gold and would thus have been too heavy for one or two persons to carry it on their shoulders, as the frieze depicts.
The theory is that the Temple treasures, including the Ark, were brought back to Rome and ultimately ended up in the vaults of the Vatican after the collapse of the Roman Empire. Over the years, the Vatican has staunchly denied that it has possession of any of the Temple treasures.

The Ethiopian Tradition

There has been a rumor for many years that the Ark of the Covenant is in the Saint Mary of Zion Church in Axum, Ethiopia. In recent years this idea has been popularized in the writings of Grant Jeffrey, a Canadian Bible prophecy writer.
This rumor is based on a bizarre story that the Ark was smuggled out of Jerusalem by Menelik I, the supposed son of a union between the Queen of Sheba and King Solomon. Supposedly, a replica of the Ark was left in the Holy of Holies in the temple in Jerusalem. The motivation for moving the Ark was to protect it from King Manasseh, one of the most ungodly kings in the history of Judah.7
Saint Mary of Zion Church
There are all kinds of problems with this legend. For one thing, it is doubtful that the Queen of Sheba ruled over Ethiopia. It is more likely that her realm was modern day Yemen.
Regarding Menelik I, he ruled over Ethiopia around 950 BC, according to tradition. Manasseh did not become king of Judah until 253 years later. Therefore, Menelik's supposed removal of the Ark from Jerusalem could not have had anything to do with trying to protect it from King Manasseh.
Harry Atkins, an Ethiopian historian, contends that there is no record of this legend in Ethiopian history until the end of the 13th Century. At that time there was a dispute over who should be king, and one of the contenders claimed to be a descendant of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. Atkins says it was at that point that the legend of the Ark entered into Ethiopian history.8

The Heavenly Theory

Another theory regarding the fate of the Ark is that it was translated or raptured, being taken up to Heaven to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Babylonians. This theory is based upon a reference to the Ark in Revelation 11:19. This passage is a flash-forward to the end of the Tribulation when Heaven opens and Jesus returns in wrath. The writer states that when Heaven opened "the ark of His covenant appeared in His temple."
Those who reject this theory argue that the Ark seen in Heaven in this passage is the heavenly reality of which the Ark of the Covenant was only an earthly shadow or copy (Hebrews 8:5).

The Forgotten Ark

Regardless of what happened to the Ark, the Scriptures suggest that it will never be found again. This comes as quite a shock to some Christians who have assumed that the Ark must be found before the Tribulation Temple can be built and animal sacrifice re-instituted. Others have simply assumed that the Ark would be replaced in the Holy of Holies when the Lord's Millennial Temple is built.
But Jeremiah says point blank that "the ark of the covenant of the Lord... shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they miss it, nor shall it be made again" (Jeremiah 3:16). The context of this passage is the Millennial reign of Jesus, so it does not rule out the possibility of a discovery prior to that time. Conceivably, the Ark could be discovered, and Satan could use its discovery to incite the rebuilding of a Temple where an apostate sacrificial system would be re-instituted. We know that such a Temple will be built, but I doubt if its construction will be motivated by the discovery of the Ark.

The Non-Essential Ark

The important point to keep in mind here is that the rediscovery of the Ark is not essential to the rebuilding of the Temple. After all, the Temple was rebuilt by Zerubbabel following the Babylonian captivity, and the Ark had already been lost by that time. There was no Ark in the Holy of Holies during the time when Jesus worshiped in the Temple.
Nor is the Ark needed for the Millennial Temple. Ezekiel describes the Temple in great detail (chapters 40-42), and he never mentions the Ark. There is a Holy of Holies (Ezekiel 41:4), but it is empty, and it is not separated from the Holy Place by a veil.
Jesus has already entered the heavenly Holy of Holies in our behalf (Hebrews 4:14-168:1-6). He has torn away the veil that separated us from God, and He serves as our High Priest, having offered His own blood as the perfect sacrifice for our sins (Hebrews 9:11-16). He serves as our Mediator before the Father's throne (Hebrews 9:24-28).
Thus, during the Millennium, there will be no need for a human high priest or an Ark with a mercy seat. Jesus will serve as both king and high priest, and in that capacity, He will continue to serve as humanity's mercy seat. (Zechariah 6:12-13).

The True Ark

With regard to this concept of Christ as our mercy seat, let me add a penetrating insight which I picked up from John MacArthur, one of this country's greatest preachers. He pointed to a simple historical verse that contains a profound truth about Jesus being our mercy seat.
The verse is John 20:12. Speaking of Mary looking into the empty tomb of Jesus, the verse says,"she beheld two angels in white sitting, one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been lying." What Mary saw, MacArthur observed, was the new mercy seat, the perfect mercy seat.
Consider again what Mary saw. She witnessed two angels, one sitting at each end of the slab which had held the broken body of our Lord. That scene points us back to the Ark of the Covenant where two cherubim hovered over its blood splattered mercy seat!
There is no more need for the Ark. Jesus has fulfilled all that the Ark stood for. He was deity who took on flesh. He rendered complete obedience to the Law, being made perfect and becoming the source of our salvation (Hebrews 5:8-9). His blood was shed for our sins, and His victory is attested by the fact and the power of His resurrection.
Just as the Ark was designed to be a symbol of the presence of God in the midst of His people, Jesus is the ultimate expression of God's love and care and presence. He is our Ark. He is our Law. He is our Manna. He is our Budded Rod. And, thank God, He is our Mercy Seat.

Notes

1) Randall Price, Searching for the Ark of the Covenant: Latest Discoveries and Research (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 2005), p. 142.
2) Price, pp. 144-145.
3) Tacitus, Historiae, 5.9.1.
4) Babylonian Talmud, Yomah 52b and The Tosefta, Sotah 13:2).
5) Price, p. 150.
6) Ibid., p. 147.
7) "Menelik I," Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menelik_I.
8) Harry R. Atkins, "Ark of the Covenant: Not in Ethiopia," Queries & Comments, Biblical Archaeology Review (November-December, 1993), p. 78.

More Info

Concerning whether the Ark of the Covenant has truly been found, read more...

The Ark of the Covenant




The Ark of the Covenant was undoubtedly the most holy piece of furniture ever made, if it can be referred to as such. It consisted of a rectangular chest made of shittim wood and covered over with gold. The word Ark, Aron in Hebrew, means merely a chest and has been translated as 'coffin' in Gen. 50.26. God had commanded Moses to make the Ark of the Covenant (Ex. 25.10-22) and inside it Moses placed the two tables of the law. Later on, Aaron's rod that budded was placed in it (Num. 17.10), together with the golden pot that had the manna (Ex. 16.33, Heb. 9.4).

The mercy seat was a kind of lid which closed the chest from above. It was made of pure gold and was held in place by a golden ridge or crown. Beaten out of this mercy seat were two cherubim, which with their wings overshadowed the mercy seat. They were beaten out of the same piece of pure gold as the mercy seat.
A representation of the Ark of the Covennant
 
The Ark was made in Sinai by Bezaleel ben Uri, whose name appropriately means, "In the Shadow of El (God), the Son of my Light." After a long journey it was placed eventually in the Holy of Holies of Solomon's Temple. It was this former location of the Ark of the Covenant which I believe to have found.

So many researchers have proposed different locations for the Temple and/or for the Ark of the Covenant without having followed a suitable methodology to substantiate their conclusions. This researcher believes that the location of the Temple can only be found when the historical and archaeological development of the present-day Temple Mount has first been analysed. It is always best to begin with the known elements, which in this case are the outer walls of the Temple Mount . Relying on the archaeological data and the information contained in the historical sources, the research then began looking at remains within the Temple area itself.

After having established the location of the pre-Herodian square Temple Mount, the historical sources, notably the Mishnah, led us to look for the location of the Temple on or near es-Sakhra, the rocky mountain top which is visible inside the Dome of the Rock. This rock has never been properly examined and so the analysis of this prime piece of archaeological evidence had to be carried out. Not only were the negative impressions of the Temple walls discovered, but also the former location of the Ark of the Covenant. As the measurements given in Middot were found to be very accurate, the location of the Temple Courts and the Altar could also be accurately calculated.

But let us begin at the beginning and briefly go over the stages of the research which led to our latest conclusions.

THE 500 CUBIT SQUARE TEMPLE MOUNTThe two descriptions of the Temple Mount, one by Josephus and the other in the Mishnaic tractate Middot appear to contradict each other. According to Josephus, the Solomonic Temple Mount was a square "having a circumference of four stades, each side taking up the length of a stade" (Ant. 15.400). After Herod had enlarged the Temple Mount, the circumference measured six stadia (War 5.192). Middot 2.1 states that "the Temple Mount (Har habbayit) measured five hundred cubits by five hundred cubits."

The problem with this statement is that Middot was written after the Roman destruction of 70 A.D., i.e. after the destruction of Herod's Temple Mount. We know from archaeology that the Temple Mount is not now square in shape, but rather oblong. Both records agree, however, that the Temple Mount was square at one stage of its development. Other discrepancies in the texts complicate matters further. Middot for example, records only one gate in the western wall, while Josephus describes four gates. In the Western Wall of the Temple Mount, four gates have indeed been found, and therefore it has been assumed up until now that the description by Josephus is more reliable than that of Middot.

However, a solution to this problem has been provided by my research, which has located the original 500 cubit square Har habbayit, as described in Middot. It appears that the two sources actually do not contradict, but rather compliment each other. It also became clear that only the pre-Herodian square Temple Mount was considered worthy of the title of Har habbayit in Middot, while Herod's addition was grandly ignored. Josephus acknowledges that the Temple Mount was once square, although his measurement of one stadium (365 cubits) falls short of the Mishnaic 500 cubits, which has proved to be the correct measurement. In short, Josephus concentrates on the Herodian Temple Mount, although he knew that the pre-Herodian Temple Mount was square, while Middot concentrates on the smaller square Temple Mount, as only this part was considered holy.
Plan showing the archaeological evidence for the location
of the 500 cubit square Temple Mount
 

THE STEP

The starting point of the research was the odd angle of the step at the north-west corner of the raised Moslem platform. Eight flight of steps topped by arcades lead up to the platform of the Dome of the Rock. The steps near the Qubbat el-Khadr are the only ones not built parallel to the walls of the platform, their direction being derived from the angle of the bottom step. This step is made up of a line of single ashlars, in contrast to the other steps of this flight, which are made up of many smaller stones. It appears therefore that this step, which is virtually parallel to the eastern wall of the Temple Mount, is, in effect, the remains of an early wall. The central part of the eastern wall near the Golden Gate, as will be seen below, also contains masonry which pre-dates the Herodian period. As the style of masonry used in this step/wall resembles that found in the central section of the eastern wall, we have therefore identified it as the western wall of the pre-Herodian Temple Mount.

FOSSE

In order to determine how far north the original western wall extended, we turn to the records of Warren, who describes an "excavated ditch," which he found 52 feet (15.85 m.) north of this stairway. Strabo, the Greek geographer and historian, describes this moat or "fosse" and gives its measurements as 60 feet (18.30 m.) deep and 250 feet (76.20 m.) broad. From a defensive point of view, the importance of the fosse is obvious, as it completes the natural boundary to the north of the pre-Herodian Temple Mount, linking the Tyropoeon Valley on the west with the Bethesda Valley, which is a branch of St. Anne's Valley, flowing eastward into the Kedron Valley. The approach to the Temple Mount from the north was thus effectively cut off.

The same fosse, together with the Bethesda Valley, is recorded by Josephus as having been filled in by Pompey's soldiers in 63 B.C., thereby enabling them to storm the defensive towers built at the north-western corner of the square Temple Mount. These towers stood apparently in the space of 52 feet between the stairway and the fosse. The western step/wall could therefore not have continued far in a northerly direction.

NORTHERN ROCKSCARPTurning to the east, we noticed in the records of Warren that he found along the northern wall of the raised platform, in Cistern 29, the remains of a quarried rockscarp. Further remains of this scarp can be seen near the north-east corner of this platform. Continuing the line of the northern rockscarp westwards and eastwards, we find the northern wall of the square platform. The northernmost stone of the step actually fits exactly in the right-angled corner with the northern wall.

Continuing the line of the rockscarp eastward, we find the north-east corner of the pre-Herodian Temple Mount at the point where it meets the eastern wall, just north of the Golden Gate, at 1,101 feet (335.60 m.) north of the Herodian south-east corner. Some 38 feet (11.60 m.) to the north of this north-east corner of the square Temple Mount, an offset can be seen, which probably was part of a projecting tower.

500 CUBITSThe length of the northern wall, measured between the step and the eastern wall, is 861 feet (262.50 m.) This distance turns out to be exactly 500 cubits according to the Royal Cubit of 20.67 inches (0.525 m.). Many tombs around Jerusalem have been cut in the rock, using the length of this cubit as the unit of measurement. This cubit originated in Egypt and is recorded in the Hebrew Bible as "the cubit of the first measure" (2 Chron. 3.3). It is the same measurement as the "cubit and a handbreadth" of Ezekiel 40.5, which shows that a smaller cubit was in use also.

BENDFrom the south-east corner of the present-day Temple Mount, the eastern wall shows Herodian masonry for some 106 feet. At that point a seam, or straight joint, is visible, to the north of which Hasmonean masonry appears. Warren noted that 240 feet (73.40 m.) north of the south-east corner, the eastern wall changes its direction slightly. Standing at this corner and looking northwards, this change can be seen with the naked eye. This bend is located at the point where a pillar sticks out from the wall, which is known as Mohammed's Pillar. As this bend is located exactly 861 feet or 500 cubits south of the projected north-east corner of the square Temple Mount, it provides archaeological evidence for the existence of the south-east corner of the square platform, which is probably preserved deep below ground.

SOUTHERN WALLThe southern wall of the square Temple Mount should be parallel to its northern wall. The intersection of the southern wall with the southern continuation of the line of the step would form the south-west corner of the square Temple Mount.

Further support for the location of the southern boundary of the early square Temple Mount can be obtained from the location of the Akra (see pp. 19-20) and the Herodian underground passageways of the Double, Triple and Barclay's Gates.

The southern passageways are approximately 240 feet (73 m.) long and terminate at the line of the proposed early southern wall. They thus reflect in their length the size of the southern extension of the square Temple Mount.

The underground passage of Barclay's Gate is L-shaped. The reason for this is, that Herod's builders built the southern part of the stairway alongside the later Hasmonean extension of the earlier western wall, instead of piercing through it. The distance from the turn of the passageway to the eastern wall is 500 cubits, which again confirms our location of the 500 cubit square Temple Mount.

HEZEKIAH'S SQUARE TEMPLE MOUNTIt is not easy to determine when the square Temple Mount was first built. In the light of Josephus' record in War 5.184,185, it does not seem likely that Solomon is the originator of this square platform, "though the Temple, as I said, was seated on a strong hill, the level area on its summit barely sufficed for shrine and altar, the ground around it being precipitous and steep. But King Solomon, the actual founder of the Temple, having walled up the eastern side, a single portico was reared on this made ground; on its other sides the sanctuary remained exposed. In course of ages, however, through the constant additions of the people to the embankment, the hill-top by this process of levelling up was widened." It was therefore some time after King Solomon had built the Temple that an artificial mount, the Temple Mount, was created round the sanctuary.

The first time the phrase "Temple Mount" or more precisely "Har Bayit-YHWH" - "The Mount of the House of Yahweh" is used in Scripture is during the reign of Manasseh (2 Chron. 33.15). As it seems unlikely that Manasseh did anything good for the Temple of Jerusalem, but rather against it, it is reasonable to suggest that it was his father Hezekiah, the great builder, who actually constructed a square artificial mount around the original Temple of Solomon. Previously, Solomon's Palace and the House of the Forest of Lebanon stood to the immediate south of the Temple, but, as there is no reference to the destruction of these buildings in the Biblical account of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, they were probably dismantled earlier by Hezekiah in order to build "The Mount of the House of Yahweh." In Isa. 22.8-11, the prophet describes the building activities of Hezekiah, i.e. the Pool of Siloam (vs. 9) and the Broad Wall (vs. 10). The evidence for the removal of Solomon's Palace and the House of the Forest of Lebanon may be found in vs. 8, "thou didst look in that day to the armour of the house of the forest." This therefore seems to further indicate that the square Temple Mount was constructed before the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. and more precisely during the reign of King Hezekiah.

Comparing the two accounts of the building of the Temple, the first in 1 Kings chapters 6 and 7, and the second in 2 Chron. chapters 3 and 4, many differences become apparent. In the first description, the pillars of brass were 18 cubits in height, while the second records them as 35 cubits high. The height of the first Porch is not given; the second one was 120 cubits high. As the porch was probably made in proportion to the pillars before them, one can assume that the first porch was lower than the second. In the first account the Temple was surrounded by three storeys of chambers; in the second account these chambers have been replaced by upper chambers. The first laver had knops under the rim; the second had two rows of oxen. The first contained 2000 baths; the second 3000. From all this we must conclude that the Temple which was destroyed by the Babylonians, was not the same building which was constructed by Solomon. During the First Temple period, which lasted more than 400 years, the Temple had apparently undergone many changes and repairs. This is the reason then for the two different descriptions. Solomon's Temple obviously had suffered so much from neglect, wanton destruction and earthquakes, that King Hezekiah had it completely renewed and made a 500 cubit square artificial mount around it in order to restore its glory. It was this Temple that was destroyed by the Babylonians. However, despite all the changes and rebuilding, this last Temple is still referred to as the First Temple. The one built after the Babylonian exile was called the Second Temple.

THE LOCATION OF SOLOMON'S TEMPLEAlthough some researchers would place the Temple elsewhere, Josephus clearly states that Solomon built the Temple on the top of the mountain. The Sakhra inside the Dome of the Rock is indeed the top of the Temple Mount and to place the Temple in a different and therefore lower place would contradict this historical record.

The problem with the Sakhra is that some scholars make it the place where the Altar of Burnt Sacrifices stood, while others, including myself, locate the Holy of Holies over the Rock. An additional, although related, problem is Araunah's threshing floor, which some say was located on the Sakhra.

There are several objections to putting the Altar over the Rock. First of all, the Mishnah (Middot 3.4) says that the Altar was made of whole stones, "taken from the valley of Beth Kerem" (a few miles away from the Temple), and not of natural rock. The proponents of the 'Sakhra = Altar' theory say that the cave below served to drain away the blood, but recent observations have established that this cave has no outlet and therefore could not have fulfilled this function. Also, the Altar, which measured 55 feet square, was larger than the Rock, whose dimensions are 43 by 56 feet. It would therefore make both Rock and cave disappear below its construction, making it impossible for the blood to drain away. Finally, in Jewish understanding, the higher the ground level, the holier the location. This would indicate that the Holy of Holies would have occupied the highest place on the mountain as most Orthodox Jews indeed believe.
The Location of the Holy of Holies and the
Ark of the Covenant on the Sakhra
 
The problem with locating the Holy of Holies over the Sakhra is that the Sakhra is larger than the Holy of Holies. A solution to this problem would be if at least one of the walls of the Holy of Holies were built over the Rock. Indeed, in the summer of '94, the research I was engaged in led to the discovery of the foundation trench of the southern wall of the Holy of Holies. Certain areas on the Rock, to the west of the opening in the ceiling of the cave, are flat receptacles for rectangular ashlars. Two are clearly visible and there are some other areas to the south of these, just before the rock slopes down steeply to the south. When viewed from the east, looking west over the opening, the two flat areas look like a channel cut across the Sakhra from east to west. The total width of all these areas is about 10 feet which corresponds, according to the cubit of 20'8'' which was used in the building of the Temple, with 6 cubits - the width of the original Temple wall.

The distance between this foundation trench and the northernmost rockscarp is exactly 10.50 m. or 20 cubits (see plan illustration above). This rockscarp then, which continues below the floor for another meter, was the place of the northern wall of the Holy of Holies.

The western wall would have stood at the foot of the natural western scarp. As the direction of the scarp is virtually identical to that of the step and of the eastern wall of the Temple Mount, the Temples of both the First and Second Temple periods would have had the same orientation, i.e. the longitudinal axis of the Temple would have been at right angles to the eastern wall. As the western scarp is a natural one and therefore never changed its direction, there are no grounds to believe that the axis of the First Temple would have been different to that of the Second Temple period. The continuation of this axis, which is at right angles to the eastern wall of the Temple Mount, is aligned with the top of the Mount of Olives, where the Red Heifer was sacrificed (see Fig. 3). According to Middot 2.4, "the [High] Priest, that burns the [Red] Heifer and stands on the top of the Mount of Olives should be able to look directly into the entrance of the Sanctuary when the blood is sprinkled." This then is another confirmation of our location and orientation of the Temple.

There never was a stone wall between the Holy of Holies (Kodesh haKodashim or Dvir) and the Holy (also called Heichal) and therefore no signs of such a partition would have been visible on the sloping surface in the east of the Sakhra. In Solomon's Temple there was a wooden partition and in the Second Temple a veil separating the two chambers. After I had set out on plan this dividing line, together with the location of the Holy of Holies, I was struck by the location of a depression right in the middle of this square.

THE FORMER LOCATION OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT IN SOLOMON'S TEMPLEThe last time the Ark of the Covenant is mentioned in Scripture was when King Josiah (in 623 B.C.) ordered the Ark to be put back in the Temple (2 Chron. 35.3). From this we understand that during the reign of wicked kings, the priests would have taken the Ark out of the Temple and hidden it away somewhere. There is no further mention of the Ark in the Biblical record after this, but it does not seem likely that the Ark was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C., as such a calamity would certainly have been mentioned. When the Second Temple was rebuilt in the time of Ezra, the Ark was not returned to the Temple. The Holy of Holies presumably remained empty until the destruction of Herod's Temple in 70 A.D. Indeed, according to Josephus, the inner chamber of the Temple was completely empty, "In this stood nothing whatever: unapproachable, inviolable, invisible to all, it was called the Holy of Holy" (War 5.219). He was apparently unaware of the existence of this most interesting feature. According to my plan, it falls exactly in the centre of the Holy of Holies. The dimensions of this level basin agree with those of the Ark of the Covenant which were 1.5 x 2.5 cubits (2'7" x 4'4" or 79 cm. x 131 cm.), with the longitudinal axis coinciding with that of the Temple. Its location is rather unique, as it could only have been the place where the Ark of the Covenant once stood. It appears to me therefore that during the First Temple period, an emplacement was prepared for the Ark by cutting this flat basin in the rock, for it is clear that without such a flat area, the Ark would have wobbled about in a most undignified manner, which would have been inconceivable.

Several texts in 1 Kings 6 and 8 may actually refer to a specially prepared place for the Ark. In 1 K. 6.19 it says that Solomon prepared the Oracle (Dvir) in the midst of the house from within "to place there the Ark of the Covenant of Yahweh" and in 1 Kings 8.6, "the priests brought in the Ark of the Covenant of Yahweh unto his (or its) place, into the Dvir of the house, to the most holy (Kodesh haKodashim), under the wings of the Cherubim." This means that a special place was prepared or assigned to the Ark. This is further emphasised in vss. 20,21 of the same chapter, where Solomon says that he has "built an house for the name of Yahweh God of Israel. And I have set there a place for the Ark..." The Hebrew verb "seem" (sin-yod-mem) which is translated here as 'set', can also mean 'put' or 'make.' In the light of this discovery, I suggest to translate this verse as "I have made there a place for the Ark."

This small basin which Solomon had made has been preserved up to today. Of course, its orientation mystified me at first, as most representations show the Ark standing in the Tabernacle or in the Temple with its longer side facing the partition, while now it is clear that it was the shorter side that was first seen by the High Priest when he entered the Holy of Holies. Contemplating this, it became obvious that this was, of course, the only way it could have stood, as otherwise the priests would not have been able to take out the staves (1 Kings 8.8). This would have been impossible regarding the position of the two large cherubim under whose wings the Ark was placed, and also, as the staves were supposed to be 10 cubits long according to the Talmud Yoma 54a, they would have hit, on their removal, the walls of the Holy of Holies, which was only 20 cubits square. Sometimes the staves are represented as having been fixed along the two shorter sides of the Ark. Not only is this an unnatural way of carrying long objects, but also it would be impossible to place the Ark in its receptacle, as the staves would have touched the two large cherubim first.

In the Temple of Solomon and in the later reconstructions, the eastern slope would have served as a ramp for the High Priest to ascend once a year, on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), to the Holy of Holies. Later, Herod created a six cubit high foundation for his Temple, which almost completely buried the Rock. This would agree with Yoma 5.2: "After the Ark was taken away a stone remained there from the time of the early Prophets, and it was called 'Shetiyah'. It was higher than the ground by three finger breadths. On this he used to put [the fire-pan]." From this record it appears that only the very top of the Sakhra remained visible inside the Holy of Holies. Instead of the ramp inside the Solomonic Temple, the Herodian Temple floor was reached by a 12 stepped staircase, which was located outside the Temple, in front of the Porch. The new floor was apparently a little (three finger breadths) lower than the top of the Sakhra which was the floor of the Holy of Holies.

We believe that during the Second Temple period, the High Priest on Yom Kippur placed his censer or fire-pan in this depression, which was the same place where, during the First Temple period, the Ark of the Covenant stood.

ARAUNAH'S THRESHING FLOOR AND THE LOCATION OF THE ALTARAnother Biblical description had to fit in with the location of the Holy of Holies on the Sakhra and that is the location of the Altar and the connection with the threshing floor of Araunah. The location of the First Temple is, of course, closely related to the threshing floor of Araunah, the Jebusite King, of whom David bought it to build an altar to the Yahweh his God (1K. 24. 18-25). It is generally believed to have been built in the same place where Isaac was bound, as related in Gen. 22.

However, we would like to be more precise about the relationship between the Sakhra and the location of Araunah's threshing floor and the altars erected by Abraham and David and the place of Solomon's Temple. First of all therefore we have to examine the historical information as preserved in the Hebrew Bible.

It is interesting to note that in both cases Abraham and David were shown the place where they were to build the altar by divine instruction. Abraham was sent to the land of Moriah to "offer him [Isaac] there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of" (Gen. 22. 2). After Abraham was withheld by the angel from sacrificing Isaac, he called the name of the place "YHWH yiraeh" as it is said this day "beHar YHWH yiraeh." This latter phrase can be translated "in the mountain Yahweh will provide," or "in the mountain the Yahweh shall be seen." Both translations have, of course, a prophetic impact. But where was the exact spot where Abraham built the altar? We are not told in Genesis, but the prophetic meaning of the words of Abraham would indicate the establishment of a continuous sanctity of this place as an altar.

Next we read about events which occurred towards the end of David's life and which are recorded in 2 Sam. 24 and 1 Chron. 21. God was going to punish Israel, because David had ordered Joab to count Israel and Judah, apparently having forgotten the injunction recorded in Ex. 30.12 to make provision for paying a ransom per head. When an angel was sent by God to bring a pestilence upon Israel, he was stopped when he stretched out his hand over Jerusalem (2 Sam. 24.15,16). It is instructive to note where David saw the angel "And the angel of the Yahweh stood by the threshing floor of Ornan [Araunah] the Jebusite. And David having lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of the Yahweh stand between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem" (1 Chron. 21. 15,16).

Two things should be noted here, first of all that the angel did not stand on the threshing floor, but beside it (etsel in Hebrew), and secondly that the angel must have stood on higher ground. Now, threshing floors are not usually located on the top of a mountain but a little below it, so that the wind will carry away the chaff only and not the grains as well. The prevailing wind in Israel is from the west, so that we would expect Araunah's threshing floor to be located below and to the east of the Sakhra.

The position of the angel, beside the floor, is called "between the earth and the heaven." He was standing evidently higher than David, so that it seems most likely that the angel stood on top of the Sakhra, as it were between heaven and earth, as he also had direct communication with God in heaven, although he was standing on the ground.

David subsequently bought the threshing floor from Araunah. He paid first 50 silver shekels for the threshing floor (2 Sam. 24. 24) and later 600 shekels of gold for the whole mountain (1 Chron. 21. 25), establishing his ownership of the Temple Mount. He then built an altar, not on top of the mountain, where the angel stood, i.e. the Sakhra, but on the threshing floor, which was lower down (2 Sam. 24.24,25), in a location which is now 20 feet east of the Dome of the Chain.

From the text then, it is therefore obvious that the Sakhra could not have been the place of the Altar. The Sakhra would also have been too small for a threshing floor as the oxen would be in continuous danger of falling over the steep edge. An additional difficulty would be that if the Temple was built to the west of the Sakhra it would have needed very deep foundations, much deeper than the 6 cubits mentioned, as the rock there slopes away quite rapidly.

There is further historical evidence in the Scriptures showing that the Holy of Holies was located in the highest point of the Temple. In Isa. 6,1 the prophet sees a vision of the Lord sitting in the Temple, "high and lifted up." The place reserved for the Deity was undoubtedly the Holy of Holies, where only the High Priest once a year was allowed to enter on Yom Kippur (Lev. 16. 29,30), i.e. on the tenth day of the seventh month. The vision, which is also referred to in John 12.41, occurred during the year that King Uzziah died, presumably of the leprosy which he contracted when offering incense in the Temple, which he was not allowed to do (2 Chron. 26. 16-21). It appears therefore that the Holy of Holies was higher than any other part of the Temple. The angel, which David saw, was therefore standing in the place which later became the Holy of Holies, possibly on the very spot where the Ark was later placed in the centre of the inner chamber. After all, that was the oracle of God from where he spoke, "And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim: and he spake unto him" (Num. 7.89).

THE ARK AND THE FUTURETo have found the former location of the Ark of the Covenant, so wonderfully preserved, was a totally unexpected conclusion to my 22 years of research on the Temple Mount. In recent years there has been a surge of interest in finding the actual Ark of the Covenant. According to the Book of Maccabees, Jeremiah hid the Ark on Mount Nebo in Jordan. A recent theory places the Ark in Ethiopia, while many rabbis believe that it is still hidden somewhere under the Temple Mount. This belief is mainly based on 1 Kings 8.8 "and they drew out the staves, that the end of the staves were seen out in the holy before the oracle, and they were not seen without: and they are there unto this day." "Unto this day" are supposed to be the key words which indicate that the Ark is still hidden today somewhere under the Temple Mount. A few years ago a group of rabbis did some illegal digging under the Temple Mount, which, not surprisingly caused considerable disturbance among the local Arab population.

Despite all the claims and expectations, however, nobody knows where the Ark of the Covenant actually is. Recently, while rereading the account in Numbers 3 concerning the responsibilities of the various Levitical families vis-a-vis the Tabernacle, we noticed in verse 30 of this chapter, that the name of the chief of the Kohathites, who was the first person to have the charge of the Ark of the Covenant, was called Elizaphan ben Uzziel. His name means "My God (El) has hidden" and he was the son of "My Strength is El." It is a comforting thought that if the Ark still exists and has a future role to play, then it must have been hidden with the knowledge of God himself and that it will be found only when it is in His purpose.

This article has been republished with permission. For more information regarding the ministry of Leen and Kathleen Ritmeyer, visit Ritmeyer Archaeological Design at www.ritmeyer.com